Linux LVM users
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Urs Thuermann <urs@isnogud.escape.de>
To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] LVM and *bad* performance (no striping)
Date: 26 May 2001 13:17:26 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <m2ofsguzp5.fsf@isnogud.escape.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010515131357.D524@tykepenguin.com>; from Patrick Caulfield on Tue, 15 May 2001 13:13:57 +0100

Patrick Caulfield <caulfield@sistina.com> writes:

> I think one problem is that your "benchmarks" are not very realistic. In 
> real world use the overhead of LVM is very small. I would respectfully suggest
> that you try something like bonnie++ before getting too worried about the 
> performance of LVM on your machine - unless you spend most of your day doing
> "dd" to your disks :-)

The reason I tested dd on the partition and on the LV is that I
thought when the performance of the block device is bad (like it is on
my LV) this will have an impact on a mounted file system on that LV.
If also thought, the performance of dd if=/dev/vg0/test will be
approximately equal to dd if=/mnt/foo od md5sum foo where foo is large
file on the LV.

I've done some tests with a file system on /dev/sda5 and the on
/dev/vg0/test (which is a LV on /dev/sda5) and I am really surprised:

First, I repeated my previous tests:

						         $dev

                                                /dev/sda5    /dev/vg0/test
---------------------------------------------+-------------+----------------
dd if=$dev of=/dev/null bs=512 count=1048576 |    71.2s    |   122.7s
dd if=$dev of=/dev/null bs=64k count=8192    |    71.5s    |    71.7s

Then I made a ext2 filesystem with 1K blocksize on /dev/sda5, mounted
it to /mnt, copied a 512MB random file to it, md5sum'med that fie and
dd'ed that file to /dev/null.  Then I recreated /dev/vg0/test and did
the same tests and that block device:

---------------------------------------------+-------------+----------------
cp -a /usr/local/foo /mnt                    |    96.6s    |   123.4s
md5sum /mnt/foo                              |    89.8s    |    92.4s
dd if=/mnt/bar of=/dev/null bs=512           |    71.8s    |    72.1s
dd if=/mnt/bar of=/dev/null bs=64k           |    71.7s    |    72.5s


When I use a 4K blocksize on the ext2 filesystem the times for
/dev/sda5 and /dev/vg0/test are even closer.

Result: Although the block device /dev/vg0/test is significantly
slower than /dev/sda5 (where /dev/vg0/test is located on /dev/sda5)
the *read* performance of the file system on top the block device is
roughly the same.  This is probably not some effect of buffer caching
since I did a blockdev --flushbufs $dev before each test, and
/usr/local/bar is 512MB in size which is twice as large as the main
memory size on that machine.

However, writing to an LV is still much slower than to a normal
partition.


urs

  reply	other threads:[~2001-05-26 11:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-02-26 15:44 [linux-lvm] LVM and *bad* performance (no striping) Urs Thuermann
2001-02-26 20:39 ` Joe Thornber
2001-02-26 21:03   ` Jorg de Jong
2001-02-26 21:38     ` Rik van Riel
2001-02-27  8:35   ` Patrick Caulfield
2001-02-27 12:21   ` Urs Thuermann
2001-02-28 11:05     ` Heinz J. Mauelshagen
2001-04-10 19:30       ` Urs Thuermann
2001-04-10 21:37         ` Andreas Dilger
2001-04-11 11:23           ` Urs Thuermann
2001-04-11 19:49             ` Andreas Dilger
2001-04-11 22:00               ` Terje Kvernes
2001-05-15 11:46               ` Urs Thuermann
2001-05-15 12:13                 ` Patrick Caulfield
2001-05-26 11:17                   ` Urs Thuermann [this message]
2001-05-27  7:47                     ` Andreas Dilger
2001-05-27  9:47                       ` Urs Thuermann
2001-05-27 17:01                       ` [linux-lvm] LVM and *bad* performance (counterexample) idsfa
2001-05-15 17:08                 ` [linux-lvm] LVM and *bad* performance (no striping) Andreas Dilger
2001-05-26 11:23                   ` Urs Thuermann
2001-02-26 21:41 ` Rik van Riel
2001-02-27 10:33   ` Urs Thuermann

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=m2ofsguzp5.fsf@isnogud.escape.de \
    --to=urs@isnogud.escape.de \
    --cc=linux-lvm@sistina.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox